dorset innovation park zone/15...• the assets at wool stw include: inlet works, two circular...

Dorset Innovation park

Wool STW Odour Impact

Assessment

Purbeck District Council

Date: 8 February 2019

Doc ref: DOR-HYD-XX-XX-Y-RP-0001-P02

HYDROCK TECHNICAL REPORT | Purbeck District Council | Dorset Innovation park | DOR-HYD-XX-XX-Y-RP-0001-P02 | 8 February 2019 i

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

Issued by Hydrock Consultants Limited Over Court Barns Over Lane Almondsbury Bristol BS32 4DF

Tel: 01454 619533 Fax: 01454 614125 www.hydrock.com

Client Purbeck District Council

Project name Dorset Innovation park

Title Wool STW Odour Impact Assessment

Doc ref DOR-HYD-XX-XX-Y-RP-0001-P02

Project no. C-08012-C

Status S1

Date 08/02/2019

Document Production Record

Issue Number 01 Name

Prepared by AD

Checked by BK

Approved by BK

Document Revision Record

Issue Number Status Date Revision Details

P01 S1 04/01/2019 Draft for review by Wessex Water

P02 S2 18/01/2019 Final after comments for Wessex Water

P03 S2 08/02/2019 Final submission

Hydrock Consultants Limited has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of the above named

client for their sole and specific use. Any third parties who may use the information contained herein do so at

their own risk.

HYDROCK TECHNICAL REPORT | Purbeck District Council | Dorset Innovation park | DOR-HYD-XX-XX-Y-RP-0001-P02 | 8 February 2019 1

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 3

Wool STW Odour Impact Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 3

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 4

2. SITE LOCATION ............................................................................................................................................ 5

Site location ................................................................................................................................................ 5

Complaints Data .......................................................................................................................................... 5

3. RELEVANT LEGISLATION .............................................................................................................................. 6

IAQM ........................................................................................................................................................... 6

DEFRA ......................................................................................................................................................... 6

Environment Agency ................................................................................................................................... 6

4. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 7

Scope of Assessment .................................................................................................................................. 7

Odour assessment criteria .......................................................................................................................... 8

5. SEWAGE TREATMENT PROCCES ............................................................................................................... 11

Wool Sewage Treatment works ................................................................................................................ 11

6. ESTIMATION OF ODOUR EMISSIONS ........................................................................................................ 13

7. DISPERSION MODEL SETUP AND ASSUMPTIONS ...................................................................................... 15

Dispersion model ...................................................................................................................................... 15

Meteorological assumptions ..................................................................................................................... 15

Terrain ...................................................................................................................................................... 15

Receptor Grid ............................................................................................................................................ 15

Volume/ area Sources ............................................................................................................................... 16

Limitations ................................................................................................................................................ 16

8. DISPERSION MODELLING RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 17

Modelling results ...................................................................................................................................... 17

Discussion ................................................................................................................................................. 18

9. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................ 20

Tables

Table 1 - H4 Benchmark odour criteria .................................................................................................................... 9

Table 2 – IAQM proposed odour effect descriptor for impacts of predictive modelling – “Moderately offensive”

odours ...................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Table 3 – Table of odour sources at Wool STW. .................................................................................................... 12


Table 4 – Table of odour sources at Wool STW. .................................................................................................... 14

Table 5 – Modelling parameters for all odour sources. ......................................................................................... 21

Table 6 – AERMET parameters by sector ............................................................................................................... 25

Figures

Figure 1 - Site location of the proposed development (red), Brownsea House (blue) and Wool STW in green ...... 5

Figure 2 – Location of assets within Wool Sewage Treatment Works ................................................................... 11

Figure 3 – Dispersion modelling plot using ADMS 5.2 and 2016 meteorological data from Bournemouth ........... 17

Figure 4 – Dispersion modelling plot using AERMOD and 2016 meteorological data from Bournemouth ............ 18

Figure 5 – Windrose for the 2016 weather data from Bournemouth Airport........................................................ 22

Figure 6 – ADMS modelling plot using 2013 meteorological data ......................................................................... 23




Figure 10 – Plans for the northern boundary of the site ........................................................................................ 26

Appendices

Appendix A – Modelling parameters

Appendix B – Wind rose

Appendix C – Meteorological sensitivity

Appendix D – AERMET parameters

Appendix E – Boundary information


Executive Summary

Wool STW Odour Impact Assessment

Hydrock have been appointed on behalf of Stride Treglown to undertake a desktop Odour Impact Assessment

(OIA) to assess the risk of odour exposure on the proposed Dorset Innovation Park, from Wool Sewage

Treatment Works (STW).

The study area lies within Purbeck District Council (PDC) local authority and 150m away from Wool Sewage

Treatment Works (STW), which is owned and operated by Wessex Water. Wessex Water undertook a

Preliminary Odour Risk Assessment (PORA) and deemed there to be a risk to the development site from odour

and have requested that desktop odour modelling be undertaken.

A quantitative odour modelling assessment, using ADMS 5.2, has been carried out to establish the future odour

situation in the area. Odour emission rates were defined based on reference odour concentrations and

emission rates data from Wessex Water7, UKWIR emission rates1 and sampled emission rates from other

sewage.

• The assets at Wool STW include: inlet works, two circular activated sludge plants, two final

settlement tanks, a drum thickener and two sludge tanks. An additional odour source comes from

exporting of sludge offsite.

• Wool STW is predicted to have an overall odour emission rate of approximately 14,000 ouE/s, with

the majority coming from the sludge assets (46%) and the remainder coming from the secondary

(30%), preliminary (21%) and final treatment (3%).

• Dispersion modelling indicates the maximum 98th percentile concentration over the proposed

development site is to be less than the chosen 5 ouE/m3 odour criteria.

In this case the extent of the risk is dependent on the odour criteria chosen i.e. the risk appetite of the parties

involved. Based on guidance, 5 ouE/m3 is deemed suitable for a small sewage works near receptors that will not

be expecting as high a level of amenity as residential. Using this level there is unlikely to be adverse odour

impacts. If a lower odour criterion is deemed appropriate, there is small disagreement between the models and

therefore a risk of a slight adverse impact to the very northern boundary of the site.

The absence of any complaints from the current users of Dorset Innovation park (Brownsea House), gives

weight to complaints being unlikely if used by receptors of a similar sensitivity.

In accordance with Wessex Water recommendations (see section 8.2) an environmental protection

(compliance) component has been incorporated within the Pre-Development Notice. This requires future

detailed development projects to demonstrate a suitable approach to control the internal air quality within

buildings in plots Juno, Zebra and Dimple.

1 John Hobson, “Odour Control In Wastewater Treatment - A Technical Reference Document” (UKWIR, 2014).


1. INTRODUCTION

Hydrock have been appointed by Stride Treglown (the instructing organisation) on behalf of Purbeck District

Council (the client) to undertake a desktop Odour Impact Assessment (OIA) to assess the risk of odour exposure

on the proposed Dorset Innovation Park, from Wool Sewage Treatment Works (STW).

The study area lies within Purbeck District Council (PDC) local authority and 150m away from Wool Sewage

Treatment Works (STW), which is owned and operated by Wessex Water. Wessex Water undertook a

Preliminary Odour Risk Assessment (PORA) and deemed there to be a risk to the development site from odour

and have requested that odour modelling be undertaken.

A dispersion model has been developed using ADMS 5.2 and reference odour emissions to predict the odour at

the development site from Wool STW. Hydrock have been in contact with Wessex Water and have agreed,

given the size of the STW and the sensitivity of the receptors that a desktop OIA is sufficient at this stage to

assess the risk to the development.


2. SITE LOCATION

Site location

It is proposed to develop Dorset Innovation Park (DIP) on the site of the former Winfrith nuclear energy test

facility on the edge of Wool village near Wareham. The entire development will consist of a mixture of buildings

comprising of light industrial, research & design, industrial and distribution.

The study area lies within Purbeck District Council (PDC) local authority and 150 away from Wool Sewage

Treatment Works (STW), which is owned and operated by Wessex Water. A figure below presents the location

of Dorset Innovation Park relative to Wool STW. Wool STW process has not significantly changed in recent years

and there are no major changes to the site planned.

Figure 1 - Site location of the proposed development (red), Brownsea House (blue) and Wool STW in green

Complaints Data

Wool STW is located in a rural area with few nearby receptors, the closest receptors include the current users of

Dorset Innovation Park (the nearest being the QINETIG commercial property Brownsea House), Cliff cottage; a

bed and breakfast, and the Severn Stars Inn. Of the time of writing there have been no odour complaints to

Purbeck Council and 3 odour complaints have been made to Wessex Water, the last being in 2009.


3. RELEVANT LEGISLATION

Odour is a mixture of chemicals that when combined produce different smells. Depending on the offensiveness

of the smell and the sensitivity of the person, a smell has the potential to cause an adverse effect. The likelihood

of an adverse reaction is dependent on a number of factors known as FIDOL (Frequency, Intensity, Duration,

Offensiveness and Location). As the magnitude of these FIDOL factors increases the adverse reaction can

increase from detection of the odour through annoyance and nuisance stages and ultimately complaint action.

Odour assessments do not deal with risk to human health from the impact of the chemicals within odours and

are generally more related to a person’s amenity and quality of life, which can be severely impacted by such

nuisances as odour. England’s National planning policies do not refer to odour specifically but consider the

prevention of nuisance, of which odour could be classed, as a material consideration. Specific guidance on

odour assessment has been developed by DEFRA, the Environment Agency and the IAQM.

IAQM

Guidance on the assessment of odour for planning2, produced by IAQM, is the latest of the guidance to be

published (July 2018). It gives an overview the varying types of odour assessment, odour assessment criteria

and methods for drawing significance from predicted impacts.

IAQM advocates combining multiple assessment tools due to the subjective nature of odour and the different

uncertainties associated with each technique. Techniques for assessing odour are split into predictive and

empirical and range from a Source-Pathway-Receptor (S-P-R) qualitative assessment and sniff tests to detailed

dispersion modelling and chemical speciation.

DEFRA

DEFRA3 has previously published the Guidance on the control of Odour and Noise from commercial Kitchens

Exhaust Systems and Odour Guidance for Local Authorities4 which have both since been withdrawn. They have

not been replaced with additional odour guidance and are still a good point of reference for guidance, along

with guidance by the IAQM and the Environment Agency.

Environment Agency

Environment Agency have produced "Horizontal Guidance 4 odour management"5 which is aimed at providing

advice for larger installation to assess odour for environmental permits. This document was withdrawn in 2016

in an attempt to simplify guidance, however this document contains large amounts of information on the

science of olfactometry, odour abatement techniques, odour monitoring and is still referenced within IAQM as a

source of modelling assessment criteria.

2 IAQM, “Guidance on the Assessment of Odour for Planning,” July 2018, http://www.iaqm.co.uk/text/guidance/odour-guidance-2014.pdf. 3 DEFRA, “Guidance on the Control of Odour and Noise from Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems,” January 2005, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/645289/pb10527-kitchen-exhaust-0105.pdf. [Withdrawn] 4 DEFRA.2010. Odour Guidance for Local Authorities. [Withdrawn]. 5 Environment Agency.2011.Horizontal Guidance 4 Odour management. [Withdrawn].


4. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

An assessment has been carried out based on the methodologies and guidance set out in the Local Air Quality

Management Technical Guidance LAQM TG(16)6, H4, the IAQM Guidance on the assessment of odour for

planning7 and Wessex Waters odour risk assessment procedure for Proposed new developments8.

At this stage a desktop assessment using reference emission rates has been undertaken. This approach has

increased uncertainty when compared to using measurements from at source sampling, as a result conservative

assumption have been used to assess the risk from Wool STW.

A site visit has been undertaken to gain a snapshot of real-world conditions and to understand the processes at

the STW, which will affect the generation of odours. At this site visit the general methodology was agreed with

Wessex Water.

Scope of Assessment

The main purpose of the assessment is to quantitively assess the odour impact on Dorset Innovation Park from

the existing Wool Sewage Treatment Works (STW). This will be achieved using the following objectives:

• Undertake a site visit to gain a snapshot of real-world conditions and understand the processes at the

STW that will affect the generation of odour.

• Define odour emissions rates for each aspects of the works using information collected at site and

references emissions rates.

• Undertake dispersion modelling using ADMS 5.2 to quantitively assess the odour impact on the

proposed site.

4.1.1 Stage 1: Site visit

A site visit to Wool Sewage Treatment Works was undertaken on the 5th December 2018 to review the site

configurations, gain an understanding of normal site operations and gain a snap shot of odour conditions at the

site. This was undertaken in the presence of a Wessex Water site operator. A limited sniffing assessment was

also conducted onsite to gain a snapshot of odour conditions at various locations around the site, during the

visit no odour was detected at Dorset Innovation Park.

4.1.2 Stage 2: Defining odour emissions rate

Odour emission rates were defined based on reference odour concentrations and emission rates data from

Wessex Water7, UKWIR emission rates9 and sampled emission rates from other sewage works. Consideration

was made to the following when defining emission rates:

• The dimension of each source;

• Any disturbance/turbulence within the sewage treatment process;

6 Defra, “LAQM Technical Guidance LAQM.TG16,” April 2016, http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/documents/LAQM-TG16-April-16-v1.pdf. 7 IAQM, “Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality” (Institute for Air Quality Management (IAQM), January 2017), http://www.iaqm.co.uk/text/guidance/air-quality-planning-guidance.pdf. 8 James Humphries, “ODOUR RISK ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE FOR PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT” (Wessex Water, January 2018). 9 Hobson, “Odour Control In Wastewater Treatment - A Technical Reference Document.”


• The frequency and timing of any treatment activity.

At the request of Wessex Water, the proposed odour emission rates were reviewed, and following this review

there was a general agreement as to what odour emission rates should be applied. At the request of Wessex

Water, no seasonality factors have been applied to the preliminary/primary stages of the works.

4.1.3 Stage 3: Odour dispersion modelling

A quantitative odour modelling assessment, using ADMS 5.2, has been carried out to establish the future odour

situation in the area. This methodology is based on the FIDOL (Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness

and Location) factors and looks at the characteristics of the odour source, the effectiveness of the pathway, and

the sensitivity of the receptors.

ADM 5.2 software is commercially available, has been validated for this type of assessment and is used

extensively for OIA’s.

This model will consider/use the following data:

• Time varying profiles for the drum thickeners and sludge exports sources.

• Reference emissions data from UKWIR and Wessex Water as well as onsite measurement from

other sewage works.

• Sewage asset dimensions from google earth and onsite measurements.

• Weather data for the period 01/01/2013 to 31/12/2017 taken from Bournemouth International

Airport.

• OS50 terrain data from the Ordnance survey®.

• Sensitivity analysis using AERMOD10 air dispersion modelling software

Odour assessment criteria

Within the UK there is a range of odour criteria that could be applied to dispersion modelling results in order to

assess potential annoyance. These methods are primarily based on a mathematical relationship that links odour

annoyance with the 98th percentile odour concentration. A summary of the available odour criteria within each

guidance document is presented below:

4.2.1 Environment Agency

Initial odour guidance was released within the Environment Agency H44 guidance which was designed to give

advice relating to large scale installations (landfills, STWs, composting sector etc.), which were subject to the

permitting regulations. Table 1 presents the odour criteria contained within the H4 guidance, which suggests

minimum acceptable 98th percentile concentrations based on the odour offensive from the site. In this criterion

the sensitivity of the receptors is not considered.

10The Latest US EPA AERMOD executable (18081) has been used.


Table 1 - H4 Benchmark odour criteria

Criterion, C98 ouE/m3 Offensiveness Odour Emission Sources

1.5 Most Offensive Processes involving decaying animal or fish remains

Processes involving septic effluent or sludge Biological landfill odours

3 Moderately Offensive

Intensive livestock rearing Fat frying (food processing) Sugar beet processing Well aerated green waste

composting

5 Less Offensive Brewery Confectionery Coffee

4.2.2 Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM)

Guidance11 produced by the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) states

that:

“the following framework is the most reliable that can be defined on the basis of the limited research

undertaken in the UK at the time of writing:

• C98, 1-hour >10ouE /m3 - complaints are highly likely and odour exposure at these levels represents an

actionable nuisance;

• C98, 1-hour >5ouE /m3 - complaints may occur and depending on the sensitivity of the locality and

nature of the odour this level may constitute a nuisance; and

• C98, 1-hour > 3ouE/m3 - complaints are unlikely to occur and exposure below this level are unlikely to

constitute significant pollution or significant detriment to amenity unless the locality is highly sensitive

or the odour highly unpleasant in nature.”

4.2.3 IAQM

IAQM have recently published a 2018 update to their odour guidance for planning12, which contains a literature

review of available odour emissions criteria as well as a proposed impact table for odour from dispersion

modelling. The table below presents the IAQM impact table for moderately offensive odours in which the IAQM

classes sewage works, unless they are deemed to have particular septic conditions.

Table 2 – IAQM proposed odour effect descriptor for impacts of predictive modelling – “Moderately offensive” odours

11 CIWEM (2012) Position Policy Statement – Control of Odour. 12 IAQM.2018.Guidance on the Assessment of Odour for Planning.”

Odour exposure level C98 ouE/m3

Receptor sensitivity

Low Medium High

>10 Moderate Substantial Substantial

5-<10 Slight Moderate Substantial

3-<5 Negligible Slight Moderate

1.5-<3 Negligible Negligible Slight

0.5-<1.5 Negligible Negligible Negligible

<0.5 Negligible Negligible Negligible


There is some debate as to which odour criteria should be used, with most planning cases focusing on

residential receptors, where the criteria of 3 and 5 ouE/m3 have been accepted in the past. However, this should

be taken on a case by case basis with consideration of receptor sensitivity, specific site operations and

consideration of the level of impact which may cause complaints.

Based on the above guidance on odour impact criteria and taking into account the type of receptors (light

industrial, offices, research & design, industrial and distribution), which have been judged to be of low/medium

sensitivity, the primary odour criteria that will be used within this assessment is the 5 ouE/m3 criterion.


5. SEWAGE TREATMENT PROCCES

Wool Sewage Treatment works

Wool Sewage Treatment works is a small works on the outskirts of the town of Wool, Dorset. It has a population

equivalent of approximately 10,200 and treats sewage from a domestic origin. Sewage is pumped into the

works from 5 rising mains within the Lulworth region into an open reception chamber. Sewage is then passed

through two 6mm screens, where rags are removed, and effluent passed into a detritor where grit is allowed to

settle. Both rags and grit are deposited and stored within two open skips for removal offsite. During high flow

events there is a bypass channel, this channel bypasses the screens directly into the detritor.

From the detritor sewage is transferred, via covered pipes, into one of two circular activated sludge plants (ASP)

which are split into anoxic and aerated zones; at this stage ferric chloride is dosed to control the levels of

phosphorus within the settled sewage. The anoxic zone makes up approximately a quarter of each lane, with

the rest consisting of an aerated zone. Mixed liquors then flow into the middle of the circular tank for final

settlement and then out, fully treated, into the River Frome.

Excess sludge is pumped within a fully covered system to an open raw sludge tank on the north end of the site,

from here it is de-watered and fed into a drum thickener (within a separate building). This drum thickener

operates for 4 hours a day, with thickened sludge pumped to a separate open tank for transfer offsite.

Thickened sludge is transferred offsite two days a week, using 8 tankers.

Figure 2 – Location of assets within Wool Sewage Treatment Works


The table below describes in more detail the sources of odour at the site that have been considered within this

assessment.

Table 3 – Table of odour sources at Wool STW.

Source Stage of works Nature of source

Inlet Chamber Preliminary Open channel (turbulent)

Screen Preliminary Open channel (turbulent)

Detritor Preliminary Open channel

Grit skip Preliminary Open skip

Screening skip Preliminary Open skip

Anoxic zone Secondary Open tank

Aerobic Zone Secondary Open tank

Final Settlement Tank Tertiary Open tank

Raw sludge tank Sludge Open tank

Dewatering chamber Sludge Open channel

Drum thickener fugitive Sludge Enclosed, fugitive emissions

Thickened sludge tank Sludge Open tank

Sludge export Sludge Enclosed, fugitive emissions


6. ESTIMATION OF ODOUR EMISSIONS

As described in section 4.1.2. odour emission rates have been defined based on reference odour concentrations

and emission rates data from: Odour Control In Wastewater Treatment - A Technical Reference Document13,

UKWIR emission rates14 and sampled emission rates from other sewage works. Consideration has been made to

the following when defining emission rates:

• The dimension of each source

• Any disturbance/turbulence within the sewage treatment process

• The frequency and timing of any sewage treatment process activity

All area sources emission rates have been calculated by multiplying the total emission rate (ouE/m2/s) by the

surface area of the source.

Emissions from the drum thickener have been calculated assuming fugitive emissions from the drum thickening

building (approx. 755 m3). The emission rate was calculated based on an odour concentration of 146215ouE/m3

and a volume of the drum thickener of 1 m3, thus giving a total odour emission rate of 1462 ouE/s. Wessex

Water have confirmed that the drum thickeners are operational for 4 hours of the day and have been modelled

as such.

Emissions from the sludge exports have been calculated based on an odour concentration of 100,00016 ouE/m3

and assuming that four 27m2 tankers are evacuated over 1 hour. This gives an odour displacement of 0.03m3/s

and a total emission rate of 3000 ouE/s. Wessex Water have confirmed that there are approximately 8 tankers

exporting the sludge per week, therefore emission from offsite tanker exports are included within the model for

2 hours per week.

All sources with the exception of the drum thickener and tanker exports have been assumed to be released

continuously. Emission rates and turbulence assumptions chosen have been presented in Table 4

13 Humphries, “ODOUR RISK ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE FOR PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT.” 14 John Hobson, “Odour Control In Wastewater Treatment - A Technical Reference Document” (UKWIR, 2014) 15 SLR, “MEADOW VIEW CARE FACILITY WIVELISCOMBE BUSINESS PARK,” January 9, 2013, https://www2.tauntondeane.gov.uk/WebPages/Imaging/ViewImage/ViewImage.aspx?SRBarCode=Ty1DGSFELrbPQ0CBdT&ExtID=PDF. 16 Odournet UK, “Odour Impact Assessment for Princes Risborough Sewage Treatment Works,” December 1, 2017, https://www.wycombe.gov.uk/uploads/public/documents/Planning/New-local-plan/Local-plan-publication-version/Odour-impact-assessment-for-Princes-Risborough-sewage-treatment-works.pdf.


Table 4 – Table of odour sources at Wool STW.

The total odour emissions from the site has been predicated to be approximately 14,000 ouE/s. The inlet works

accounts for approximately 21% of emissions with 30% and 3% coming from secondary and tertiary treatment

respectively. Sludge assets are estimated to account for most of the odour emissions from the site at 46%, with

the majority of emissions coming from the open sludge tanks.

17 Humphries, “ODOUR RISK ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE FOR PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT.” 18 John Hobson, “Odour Control In Wastewater Treatment - A Technical Reference Document” (UKWIR, 2014) 19 Estimates based on typical UKWIR emission rates for the aerated zone of an activated sludge plant

Source Base emission rate (ouE/m2/s)

Turbulence factor

Total emission rate

(ouE/m2/s) Area (m2) Time factor

Total emissions (ouE/m2/s)

Percentage of emissions

Inlet below reception pipe

3117 12 372 1.0 1 372.0 2.6%

Inlet Chamber 3118 3 93 3.5 1 325.5 2.3%

Screen 3118 6 186 4.0 1 744.0 5.2%

Detritor 3118 1 31 40.0 1 1240.0 8.7%

Detritor outlet 3118 3 93 1.3 1 120.0 0.8%

Grit skip 5318 1 53 3.0 1 159.0 1.1%

Screening skip 2519 1 25 3.0 1 75.0 0.5%

Anoxic zone inlet x 2 819 3 24 2.0 1 48.0 0.3%

Anoxic zone x 2 820 1 8 209.6 1 1677.5 11.7%

Aerobic Zone x 2 419 1 4 635.0 1 2540.3 17.8%

FST x 2 0.719 1 0.7 567.2 1 397.0 2.8%

Raw sludge tank 4019 1 40 78.6 1 3142.0 22.0%

Dewatering chamber

5 1 5 1.0 1 5.0 <0.1%

Drum thickener fugitive

1462 ouE/s n/a n/a n/a 0.167 243.7 1.7%

Thickened sludge tank

40 19 1 40 78.6 1 3142 22.0%

Sludge export 3000 ouE/s n/a n/a n/a 0.012 35.6 0.2%

Total 14250.6 100.0%


7. DISPERSION MODEL SETUP AND ASSUMPTIONS

The assumptions and data used within the creation of the odour dispersion model have been presented below:

Dispersion model

ADM 5.2 software has been used to model odour emissions from Wool STW, this modelling software is

commercially available and has been validated for this type of assessment and is used extensively for OIA’s. At

Wessex Waters request a sensitivity analysis using dispersion model AERMOD (executable 18081) has been

undertaken.

Meteorological assumptions

Weather data was taken from Bournemouth international airport approximately 31km to the northeast of the

site for the individual years of 2013-2017. Isle of Portland met station is closer, approximately 20km to the

south west, however, due to its location on a coastal peninsula was not deemed representative. Both

Bournemouth and Wool STW are at similar elevations, have no significant nearby topographical features and

are 8km and 6km away from the coast, respectively.

Surface roughness has been defined as 0.7 for the dispersion site and 0.3 for the meteorological site. The

dispersion site is surrounded by a significant area of trees followed by Dorset Innovation Park itself (a mixture of

tall buildings and grassland) therefore a high surface roughness has been chosen. Appendix E shows the plans

for the northern boundary of the site, Purbeck council have also stated:

”I have attached a copy of the relevant part of the design guide which illustrates the landscaping proposals for

the northern part of the site. Purbeck is and will remain the landowner and is responsible for implementation,

maintenance and management of this area in perpetuity”

A wind rose for the 5 years of weather data from Bournemouth international airport is presented within

Appendix B, with AERMOD’s met site surface roughness presented in Annex D.

The default Monin-Obukhov length of 1m has been used, the Monin-Obukhov length represents the ratio of

turbulence generated by wind shear and thermal buoyancy, a lower value such as 1 - 10m represents a rural

area.

Terrain

A terrain file was derived from OS50 map data, this terrain data has a resolution of 50m. As the terrain features

within the area of the STW could be described as a gentle slope and terrain between the STW and the site

having a gradient of less than 1:10, 50m terrain is deemed appropriate.

Receptor Grid

A 2.1km x 2.2km cartesian receptor grid with a resolution of 20m has been used to capture the extent of odour

in the area surrounding Wool STW.

Buildings

No point sources have been included within the model, therefore no buildings have been included within the

dispersion model (see section 7.7).


Volume/ area Sources

To represent emissions from tanks and open channels area sources have been used with fugitive emissions from

the drum thickener building and tanker exports being modelled as volume sources. All area sources have been

modelled assuming an ambient temperature release therefore not benefiting from any thermal buoyancy. A full

table of source parameters can be seen in the appendix A.

Limitations

A number of factors are unable to be considered in the ADMS 5.2 simulation

• ADMS cannot account for the effects of building downwash on releases from area and volume

sources, as there are no point sources within the model, buildings have not been considered within

this assessment.

• While the modelling of intermittent tanker emissions has been included within the models, the

short-term impact may not be satisfactory assessed using an annual odour emissions criterion.

However, given the short-term and infrequent nature of the emissions and the low sensitivity of the

receptors, tanker emissions from this site are not likely to cause adverse effects.

• Abnormal operations and breakdown events which may cause events of higher odour conditions

have not been included within this assessment.


8. DISPERSION MODELLING RESULTS

Modelling results

The model outputs for the current works operation for each of the individual years modelled are presented in

appendix C. Review of these 5 outputs indicates that 2016 is to be considered the worst-case meteorological

year (in terms of exposure levels predicted across the development area). This 2016 model output is presented

in Figure 3 below. At the request of Wessex Water the 1.5 and 3 ouE/m3 odour contour has been included along

with the 5 ouE/m3 contour.

Figure 3 – Dispersion modelling plot using ADMS 5.2 and 2016 meteorological data from Bournemouth

Review of the figure above indicates that under the current operational conditions the 3 and 5 ouE/m3 98th

percentile hourly odour exposure contour is not predicted to cover any part of the development.


At Wessex Waters request sensitivity using the US EPA recommended dispersion model AERMOD was

undertaken. The 2016 model output assuming the same modelling parameters as in the ADMS 5.2 model is

presented below.

Figure 4 – Dispersion modelling plot using AERMOD and 2016 meteorological data from Bournemouth

Review of the figure above indicates that under the current operational conditions the 5 ouE/m3 98th percentile

hourly odour exposure contour is not predicted to cover any part of the development. The AERMOD model

output is slightly larger than the ADMS 5.2 output, with the 3 ouE/m3 contour covering a small section to the

north of the site.

Discussion

This assessment uses desktop emissions rates, as a result there is some uncertainty as to the odour exposure

from the site when compared to using onsite measured data. Conservative assumptions have therefore been

used for emission rates from the inlet works with seasonal time factors also removed from liquid sources.

Based on figure 3 and 4 there is some disagreement between the models about the level of odour exposure

across Dorset Innovation Park.

The ADMS dispersion modelling gives an indication that the maximum 98th percentile concentration over the

proposed development site is to be no greater than 3 ouE/m3. While AERMOD indicates that the maximum 98th

percentile concentration over the site will be between 3 and 5 ouE/m3.

Based on the modelling results it indicates that the maximum 98th percentile concentration over the proposed

development site is to be no greater than 5 ouE/m3 and therefore using the chosen odour criteria of 5 ouE/m3 an

adverse odour impact is unlikely.


Based on guidance, 5 ouE/m3 is deemed suitable for a small sewage works near receptors that will not be

expecting as high a level of amenity as residential. Using this level, it gives an indication that adverse odour

impacts are unlikely. If a lower odour criterion is deemed appropriate there is small disagreement between the

models and therefore a risk of a slight adverse impact to the very northern boundary of the site.

As recommended by IAQM guidance, dispersion modelling is to be backed up by analysis of real-world

conditions, in this case using complaints analysis. There have been no complaints regarding this site, including

from the previous occupants of Dorset Innovation park (Brownsea House), since 2009 (where 2 were registered,

with 3 in total). The absence of any complaints from the current users of Dorset Innovation park (Brownsea

House), gives weight to complaints being unlikely if used by receptors of a similar sensitivity.

Following post-submission engagement, including the review of this Odour Modelling Report, Wessex Water

has confirmed that the development proposed within the Local Development Order would be suitable. Wessex

Water recommend that the layout and design of the buildings within Juno, Zebra and Dimple plots ensure there

are no access/opening windows that face the Sewage Treatment Works (STW). Furthermore, air conditioning

units should be faced so they do not draw from the direction of the STW.

.


9. CONCLUSION

This assessment has been undertaken to assess the odour impact from Wool STW on the nearby Dorset

Innovation Park. As agreed with Wessex Water a desktop modelling exercise has been undertaken with the

conclusions summarised below:

• The assets at Wool STW include: inlet works, two circular activated sludge plants, two final

settlement tanks, a drum thickener and two sludge tanks. An additional odour source comes from

exporting of sludge offsite.

• Wool STW is predicted to have an overall odour emission rate of approximately 14,000 ouE/s, with

the majority coming from the sludge assets (46%) and the remainder coming from the secondary

(30%), preliminary (21%) and final treatment (3%).

• Dispersion modelling indicates the maximum 98th percentile concentration over the proposed

development site is to be less than the chosen 5 ouE/m3 odour criteria.

In this case the extent of the risk is dependent on the odour criteria chosen i.e. the risk appetite of the parties

involved. Based on guidance, 5 ouE/m3 is deemed suitable for a small sewage works near receptors that will not

be expecting as high a level of amenity as residential. Using this level there is unlikely to be adverse odour

impacts. If a lower odour criterion is deemed appropriate, there is small disagreement between the models and

therefore a risk of a slight adverse impact to the very northern boundary of the site.

The absence of any complaints from the current users of Dorset Innovation park (Brownsea House), gives

weight to complaints being unlikely if used by receptors of a similar sensitivity.

In accordance with Wessex Water recommendations (see section 8.2) an environmental protection

(compliance) component has been incorporated within the Pre-Development Notice. This requires future

detailed development projects to demonstrate a suitable approach to control the internal air quality within

buildings in plots Juno, Zebra and Dimple.


Appendix A – Modelling parameters

Table 5 – Modelling parameters for all odour sources.

Source Source type Source height (m) Temperature release (°C)

exit velocity (m/s)

L2 (m)

Below reception pipe Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Inlet Chamber Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Screen Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Detritor Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Detritor outlet Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Grit skip Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Screening skip Area 1.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Anoxic zone inlet x 2 Area 6.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Anoxic zone x 2 Area 6.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Aerobic Zone x 2 Area 6.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

FST x 2 Area 6.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Raw sludge tank Area 4.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Dewatering chamber Area 0.2 ambient 0.01 n/a

Drum thickener fugitive Volume 2.5 ambient n/a 5.0

Thickened sludge tank Area 4.0 ambient 0.01 n/a

Sludge export Volume 1.0 ambient n/a 2.0


Appendix B – Wind rose

Figure 5 – Windrose for the 2016 weather data from Bournemouth Airport


Appendix C – Meteorological sensitivity

Figure 6 – ADMS modelling plot using 2013 meteorological data



Appendix D – AERMET parameters

Table 6 – AERMET parameters by sector

Section Bowen Ratio Albedo Surface roughness

340-75 0.9625 0.246 0.2

75-200 0.9625 0.246 0.7

200-280 0.9625 0.246 0.1

280-340 0.9625 0.246 0.3


Appendix E – Boundary information

Figure 10 – Plans for the northern boundary of the site

dorset innovation park zone/15...• the assets at wool stw include: inlet works, two circular...

Documents